'The cradle Earth' - new anthropological fieldwork
- Paper ID
2851
- author
- company
King's College London
- country
United Kingdom
- year
2005
- abstract
As a culturally-oriented discipline anthropological perspectives cannot be overlooked in the discussion on cultural dimensions of space. This paper aims to raise some questions concerning the occurrence of the phenomenon of ‘space society’, which for the reasons of this analysis will be described as a community of peoples linked and affected on different levels by humanity’s physical or intentional presence in outer space. This is a new field to be examined by the social sciences in terms of its ideas, values, and anything that caused the formation and endurance of its intercultural, trans-national dimension. ‘Space society’ appears here on different levels of exclusiveness and inclusiveness, such as: o a generator of the scientific interests in space (exclusive) o a spectator of human endeavor to space and (inclusive) o a consumer of the goods we harvest from the upper atmosphere, such as satellite communication, TV, radio, navigation, telecommunication, etc. (to some extent inclusive) From anthropology’s origins the ideas of representing and negotiating notions of Here and Elsewhere have been paramount. Anthropologists study everything that is different, inherently Other. As people from a variety of societies we shape our identity through encounters with new phenomena; therefore things which we differentiate might simply converge. It’s hard to find anything that could be more different from Earth in its physical and conceptual design than Outer Space. Paradoxically, the more we know about it, the more we speculate on the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence, or vigorously want to prove that ‘there was a life on Mars’, the more we became glebae adscripti. We have this image of outer space, or any celestial bodies one can enumerate, in our minds. This image was shaped by different factors: by mass-entertainment, education, science-fiction books, movies, scientific nets and publications, magazines, journals, newspapers, internet, etc. In the end we are all exposed to this spectacle of images, and we all share this ‘imaginary topography of space’, along with its symbolic dimension, which can be studied by visual anthropology. The way we actually perceive this spatial environment has been mass-communicated to us, with all its rewards on the one hand, and disadvantages on the other: our growing awareness of capabilities and opportunities for humankind that stand behind technological advancement goes along with the visions of dehumanization, technological manipulation and self-destruction of humankind. In the 20th century we became capable to reach every place on Earth, but still our civilization is able to find new frontiers of time (i.e. time-zones) and space (i.e. cyberspace) that we attempt to cross. The human need for challenges is unlimited. ‘The Age of Exploration’ certainly did not end with Columbus and his aftermath. This never-ending quest lasts until today and will probably continue as long as those who follow in the footsteps of Columbus will have places to go, either physical or intellectual. The effort on the part of scientists and visionaries consequently influences and shapes our standing, both local and global. Thus, the continuous technological advancement which comes along can be the best opening point for new discoveries on our human condition.